Post the EULA or a link to it or an excerpt from it. (Please don't copout and say read the one that came with the box.)

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:> I'm sorry but you are incorrect.>> --> Carey Frisch> Microsoft MVP> Windows XP - Shell/User>>> "Greg Ro" wrote:>> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:56:03 -0700, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"> > <mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com> wrote:> >> > >If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the original, and> > >you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this is considered a "new> > >computer" and the OEM license is no longer considerd valid.> >> > Now that I know is incorrect Carey.> > Microsoft has never stated that you can't replace a motherboard and> > can not use the same oem copy you have.> >> > Even other mvp's have stated the above> > > > > > Greg Ro> >

Microsoft does not sell OEM versions to customers. OEM versionsof Windows XP were meant to be sold to System Builders. OEMversions are licensed to the very first computer it is installed upon,namely the motherboard is the determining factor. If you change toa different motherboard, you have a new computer, thus the OEMlicense ceases to exist. If you wish to avoid this issue, then only use a "Retail Version" of Windows XP.

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:> Microsoft does not sell OEM versions to customers. OEM versions> of Windows XP were meant to be sold to System Builders. OEM> versions are licensed to the very first computer it is installed upon,> namely the motherboard is the determining factor. If you change to> a different motherboard, you have a new computer, thus the OEM> license ceases to exist. If you wish to avoid this issue, then only> use a "Retail Version" of Windows XP.

Big cop out!

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

> To Alias question a about another posting.>> Sorry to use your name in the subject.

Not my name :-)

> In another thread you stated>> [I called MS and they said they dropped that requirement last year but> hadn't updated their EULAs. In Spain, it is almost impossible to buy> anything but an OEM.]>>> What requirement are you talking about and is it just Spain?>> Thank You,>> Greg Ro

The requirement for hardware when purshasing an OEM version of XP. The number I called three times, and spoke to three different people, was a USA phone number, although it is not sure that I spoke to an American. The number was for activating XP. I posted the number and old Carey and Bruce wouldn't call it and only continued to copy and paste what Carey has been spamming us with today.

What they did say is that it could only be installed on one computer, even though, in theory, that one computer could be updated to the point where all the components were replaced and it would still be a legit installation.

If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the original, and you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this is considered a "new computer" and the OEM license is no longer considerd valid.

-- Carey FrischMicrosoft MVPWindows XP - Shell/User

"Alias" wrote:

> > "Greg Ro" <webworm12@yes.lycs.com> wrote> > > To Alias question a about another posting.> >> > Sorry to use your name in the subject.> > Not my name :-)> > > In another thread you stated> >> > [I called MS and they said they dropped that requirement last year but> > hadn't updated their EULAs. In Spain, it is almost impossible to buy> > anything but an OEM.]> >> >> > What requirement are you talking about and is it just Spain?> >> > Thank You,> >> > Greg Ro> > The requirement for hardware when purshasing an OEM version of XP. The > number I called three times, and spoke to three different people, was a USA > phone number, although it is not sure that I spoke to an American. The > number was for activating XP. I posted the number and old Carey and Bruce > wouldn't call it and only continued to copy and paste what Carey has been > spamming us with today.> > What they did say is that it could only be installed on one computer, even > though, in theory, that one computer could be updated to the point where all > the components were replaced and it would still be a legit installation.> > Alias > > >

Hmm, just where does it state that the motherboard defines it as a new computer?What if the oem version of XP was bought with a case, and you kept the same case putting a new motherboard in??

Assuming of course, it is not a bios locked oem version that permanently ties it to the motherboard.

Don Burnette

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:> If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the> original, and you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this> is considered a "new computer" and the OEM license is no longer> considerd valid.>>>>>> "Greg Ro" <webworm12@yes.lycs.com> wrote>>>>> To Alias question a about another posting.>>>>>> Sorry to use your name in the subject.>>>> Not my name :-)>>>>> In another thread you stated>>>>>> [I called MS and they said they dropped that requirement last year>>> but hadn't updated their EULAs. In Spain, it is almost impossible>>> to buy anything but an OEM.]>>>>>>>>> What requirement are you talking about and is it just Spain?>>>>>> Thank You,>>>>>> Greg Ro>>>> The requirement for hardware when purshasing an OEM version of XP.>> The number I called three times, and spoke to three different>> people, was a USA phone number, although it is not sure that I spoke>> to an American. The number was for activating XP. I posted the>> number and old Carey and Bruce wouldn't call it and only continued>> to copy and paste what Carey has been spamming us with today.>>>> What they did say is that it could only be installed on one>> computer, even though, in theory, that one computer could be updated>> to the point where all the components were replaced and it would>> still be a legit installation.>>>> Alias

>If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the original, and >you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this is considered a "new >computer" and the OEM license is no longer considerd valid.

Now that I know is incorrect Carey. Microsoft has never stated that you can't replace a motherboard andcan not use the same oem copy you have.

begin trojan.vbs ... On Friday 19 August 2005 06:56 pm, Carey Frisch [MVP] had this to say in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

> If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the original,> and you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this is considered a> "new computer" and the OEM license is no longer considerd valid.> I can buy an OEM copy of XP today, by purchasing a computer fan with the OEMcopy. So what the hell are you talking about? Does that mean that down theroad if I was to replace that fan, I'd have to go and purchase another OEMcopy?

-- Have you been MicroShafted today?To mess up a Linux box, you need to work *at* it.To mess up a Windows box, you need to work *on* it.

OEM software is licensed to the complete computer system, but the motherboard is considered the "essence" of the computer system. Therefore, all internal components, except for the motherboard, can be replaced before a "new" computer has been created. If you replaced your customer's motherboard due to an upgrade (no defect), the customer should have acquired a new software license.

| Hmm, just where does it state that the motherboard defines it as a new | computer?| What if the oem version of XP was bought with a case, and you kept the same | case putting a new motherboard in??| | Assuming of course, it is not a bios locked oem version that permanently | ties it to the motherboard.| | Don Burnette

> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:56:03 -0700, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"> <mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com> wrote:> > >If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the original, and > >you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this is considered a "new > >computer" and the OEM license is no longer considerd valid.> > Now that I know is incorrect Carey. > Microsoft has never stated that you can't replace a motherboard and> can not use the same oem copy you have. > > Even other mvp's have stated the above> > > Greg Ro>

> I can buy an OEM copy of XP today, by purchasing a computer fan with the OEM> copy. So what the hell are you talking about? Does that mean that down the> road if I was to replace that fan, I'd have to go and purchase another OEM> copy?

Don Burnette wrote:> Hmm, just where does it state that the motherboard defines it as a new> computer?> What if the oem version of XP was bought with a case, and you kept> the same case putting a new motherboard in??>> Assuming of course, it is not a bios locked oem version that> permanently ties it to the motherboard.

Not in the EULA, even of BIOS-Locked OEM versions.

It isn't even in the System Builders Agreement.

It is stated on a password-protected web page, but no one, not System Builders, nor End Users agree to abide with that password-protected page, nor is there any mention of that page in the the EULA or the System Builders Agreement.

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

I build my own and use OEM, I always buy it with the case as the qualifying hardware.As far as I am concerned, as long as I use the case, the license is valid, even if it's 20 motherboards later.

-- For evil to prosper requires only that good men remain silent!"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message news:FF3B8D09-286F-4723-AF92-DB8DF0AE98A6@microsoft.com...> No. Only if you replacement the motherboard with a different model.>> -- > Carey Frisch> Microsoft MVP> Windows XP - Shell/User>>> "NoStop" wrote:>>> I can buy an OEM copy of XP today, by purchasing a computer fan with the >> OEM>> copy. So what the hell are you talking about? Does that mean that down >> the>> road if I was to replace that fan, I'd have to go and purchase another >> OEM>> copy?>

> If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the original, > and> you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this is considered a "new> computer" and the OEM license is no longer considerd valid.>> -- > Carey Frisch> Microsoft MVP> Windows XP - Shell/User>>> "Alias" wrote:>>>>> "Greg Ro" <webworm12@yes.lycs.com> wrote>>>> > To Alias question a about another posting.>> >>> > Sorry to use your name in the subject.>>>> Not my name :-)>>>> > In another thread you stated>> >>> > [I called MS and they said they dropped that requirement last year but>> > hadn't updated their EULAs. In Spain, it is almost impossible to buy>> > anything but an OEM.]>> >>> >>> > What requirement are you talking about and is it just Spain?>> >>> > Thank You,>> >>> > Greg Ro>>>> The requirement for hardware when purshasing an OEM version of XP. The>> number I called three times, and spoke to three different people, was a >> USA>> phone number, although it is not sure that I spoke to an American. The>> number was for activating XP. I posted the number and old Carey and Bruce>> wouldn't call it and only continued to copy and paste what Carey has been>> spamming us with today.>>>> What they did say is that it could only be installed on one computer, >> even>> though, in theory, that one computer could be updated to the point where >> all>> the components were replaced and it would still be a legit installation.>>>> Alias>>>>>>

Alias wrote:> "Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message> news:e9gAvxSpFHA.4088@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...> > OEM software is licensed to the complete computer system,> > but the motherboard is considered the "essence" of the> > computer system. Therefore, all internal components,> > except for the motherboard, can be replaced before> > a "new" computer has been created. If you replaced your> > customer's motherboard due to an upgrade (no defect), the> > customer should have acquired a new software license.> >

> Horsepucky. My EULA says "hardware" and does not define what constitutes> hardware. I changed a motherboard the other day with no problems. You should> research before you post blatant misinformation designed to get people to> buy another XP they don't need.>

Perhaps, and this is why I tried to get the MVP to provide some sort of"evidence" rather than just "trust me", it is that Microsoft reallyjust wants to "prevent piracy" and is thinking that the best way totell if Johnny is installing his Dell's XP CD on a new box he justbuilt, is for Microsoft to go: "New Motherboard detected! WHOO WHOOWHOO ALERT DANGER Piracy! Piracy!"

When the MVP says "OEM, OEM, OEM" is means Dell, Gateway, Compaq etc.You know, those disks that get marked, "For a new computer only! Not tobe resold!" Those that one sees at computer fleamarkets all over theplace.

That you changed an MB without problem means that there is no way forXP to detect the change and prevent itself from being installed. Iwanted to see the EULA because I wonder is MS has this kind of thing inXP or if it simply says "don't do this" inthe EULA. Perhaps the MVP isjust parroting what "he was told" (or has read).

But from a technical sense, to detect that an OS is being installed on"another computer" the OS would have to look at something in the MB.But, there really is a legitimate reason to replace a motherboard or toeven to throw away the entire computer and install its OS on a newcomputer. For software, the license is "I have a right to use thatsoftware on one computer." No license, that I am aware of, says thatthe use is limited only to the original computer. If MS gets away withthat then they really deserve their reputation as evil.

I do not have an oem version, however if I did, and I just simply upgraded my motherboard, which I do about yearly, I would continue to use it. I would be my own system builder, and using an " original equipment manufacturer" version, I would determine when it was no longer the same computer that I purchased the oem version for.

MS is very gray in this area. If they truly wanted to stick with an oem copy only, then they would only sell them to true volume system builders , such as Dell, Gateway, to supply with their systems. You would only get an oem copy included with a purchased system. You would not be able to purchase it seperately, or with a mouse , power suppy, power cord, whatever. They would not sell them to places like Wal-Mart,etc, to sell stand alone with whatever hardware device they want to sell it with, if any.

I don't see MS crying that all the oem versions Wal-mart or whomever sells are being used more than they should, so why should you?

XP Pro64 is only available as oem version. However, you can purchase it from many popular computer shops, by itself, or with a small piece of hardware. Now, do you really believe, MS expects all users of XP Pro 64, upon upgrading motherboards, to have to go out and purchase another copy while they have a perfectly good, legit copy already? Don't think so, ain't gonna happen. If that were the case, don't you think MS would be offering retail versions?

Anyone that purchases an additional copy of XP, when they have a perfectly good paid for oem version already, simply because they upgraded the motherboard, is throwing their money away imho.

Don Burnette

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:> OEM software is licensed to the complete computer system,> but the motherboard is considered the "essence" of the> computer system. Therefore, all internal components,> except for the motherboard, can be replaced before> a "new" computer has been created. If you replaced your> customer's motherboard due to an upgrade (no defect), the> customer should have acquired a new software license.>>>> Hmm, just where does it state that the motherboard defines it as a>> new computer?>> What if the oem version of XP was bought with a case, and you kept>> the same case putting a new motherboard in??>>>> Assuming of course, it is not a bios locked oem version that>> permanently ties it to the motherboard.>>>> Don Burnette

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message news:e9gAvxSpFHA.4088@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...> OEM software is licensed to the complete computer system,> but the motherboard is considered the "essence" of the> computer system. Therefore, all internal components,> except for the motherboard, can be replaced before> a "new" computer has been created. If you replaced your> customer's motherboard due to an upgrade (no defect), the> customer should have acquired a new software license.>> -- > Carey Frisch> Microsoft MVP> Windows XP - Shell/User> Microsoft Newsgroups

Horsepucky. My EULA says "hardware" and does not define what constitutes hardware. I changed a motherboard the other day with no problems. You should research before you post blatant misinformation designed to get people to buy another XP they don't need.

Alias>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->> "Don Burnette" wrote:>> | Hmm, just where does it state that the motherboard defines it as a new> | computer?> | What if the oem version of XP was bought with a case, and you kept the > same> | case putting a new motherboard in??> |> | Assuming of course, it is not a bios locked oem version that permanently> | ties it to the motherboard.> |> | Don Burnette>

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message news:56E0A055-4E4B-4C63-B264-FD670D676013@microsoft.com...> I'm sorry but you are incorrect.

NO, he isn't; you are!

Alias>> -- > Carey Frisch> Microsoft MVP> Windows XP - Shell/User>>> "Greg Ro" wrote:>>> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:56:03 -0700, "Carey Frisch [MVP]">> <mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com> wrote:>>>> >If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the >> >original, and>> >you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this is considered a >> >"new>> >computer" and the OEM license is no longer considerd valid.>>>> Now that I know is incorrect Carey.>> Microsoft has never stated that you can't replace a motherboard and>> can not use the same oem copy you have.>>>> Even other mvp's have stated the above>>>>>> Greg Ro>>

Alias"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message news:%23zrG4CUpFHA.736@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...> Microsoft does not sell OEM versions to customers. OEM versions> of Windows XP were meant to be sold to System Builders. OEM> versions are licensed to the very first computer it is installed upon,> namely the motherboard is the determining factor. If you change to> a different motherboard, you have a new computer, thus the OEM> license ceases to exist. If you wish to avoid this issue, then only> use a "Retail Version" of Windows XP.>> -- > Carey Frisch> Microsoft MVP> Windows XP - Shell/User> Microsoft Newsgroups>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->> "Dimple Wathen" wrote:>> | Post the EULA or a link to it or an excerpt from it. (Please don't cop> | out and say read the one that came with the box.)>

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message news:FF3B8D09-286F-4723-AF92-DB8DF0AE98A6@microsoft.com...> No. Only if you replacement the motherboard with a different model.>> -- > Carey Frisch

In article <433CDDE3-469B-4FE5-BBE5-84A842790487@microsoft.com>, mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com says...> If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the original, and > you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this is considered a "new > computer" and the OEM license is no longer considerd valid.

Unless the new motherboard is replacing a defective motherboard - and the new one does not have to be a matching replacement. The OEM system builders site specifically tells us this.

Leythos wrote:> In article <433CDDE3-469B-4FE5-BBE5-84A842790487@microsoft.com>,> mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com says...>> If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the>> original, and you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this>> is considered a "new computer" and the OEM license is no longer>> considerd valid.>> Unless the new motherboard is replacing a defective motherboard - and> the new one does not have to be a matching replacement. The OEM system> builders site specifically tells us this.

Notice you don't give the URL because it would show any RATIONAL human being that it is password protected.

NO End User agrees to follow what it says on that page, or even knows of that pages existense through the EULA, so there isn't a court in the land that would consider what it says on that page as part of ANY agreement!

Like Carey, you are totally full of MicroSh*t!

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

In article <1124538759.420510.248510@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, dimplewathen@hotmail.com says...> Perhaps, and this is why I tried to get the MVP to provide some sort of> "evidence" rather than just "trust me", it is that Microsoft really> just wants to "prevent piracy" and is thinking that the best way to> tell if Johnny is installing his Dell's XP CD on a new box he just> built, is for Microsoft to go: "New Motherboard detected! WHOO WHOO> WHOO ALERT DANGER Piracy! Piracy!"

There is a MS OEM system builders site, it's there for the reading if you want, that explains that "Microsoft" considers the Motherboard as the "Computer" and that changing a motherboard, except to replace a detective one, is considered as invalidating your OEM license.

What people tell you about OEM not being able to move to another system, or being invalid on a new board, is a representation of the OEM System builders information that all OEM's are aware of.

In article <ebD9jvYpFHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...> Leythos wrote:> > In article <433CDDE3-469B-4FE5-BBE5-84A842790487@microsoft.com>,> > mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com says...> >> If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the> >> original, and you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this> >> is considered a "new computer" and the OEM license is no longer> >> considerd valid.> >> > Unless the new motherboard is replacing a defective motherboard - and> > the new one does not have to be a matching replacement. The OEM system> > builders site specifically tells us this.> > Notice you don't give the URL because it would show any RATIONAL human > being that it is password protected.

I also didn't say that the user had to follow the ideals that MS presents. I was very careful to not do that this time.

[snip drivel]> Like Carey, you are totally full of MicroSh*t!

No, unlike Carey, I specifically stated:

> There is a MS OEM system builders site, it's there for the reading if> you want, that explains that "Microsoft" considers the Motherboard as> the "Computer" and that changing a motherboard, except to replace a> detective one, is considered as invalidating your OEM license.

At no point did I advocate anything - only explained why people state what they do about OEM.

Leythos wrote:> In article <ebD9jvYpFHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>,> dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...>> Leythos wrote:>>> In article <433CDDE3-469B-4FE5-BBE5-84A842790487@microsoft.com>,>>> mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com says...>>>> If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the>>>> original, and you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this>>>> is considered a "new computer" and the OEM license is no longer>>>> considerd valid.>>>>>> Unless the new motherboard is replacing a defective motherboard ->>> and the new one does not have to be a matching replacement. The OEM>>> system builders site specifically tells us this.>>>> Notice you don't give the URL because it would show any RATIONAL>> human being that it is password protected.>> I also didn't say that the user had to follow the ideals that MS> presents. I was very careful to not do that this time.

Why bring it up at all, since you should know by now that no END USER ever agrees to follow the words of a password-protected website.

What do End Users agree to abide by? The EULA, or the password-protected words?

>> [snip drivel]>> Like Carey, you are totally full of MicroSh*t!>> No, unlike Carey, I specifically stated:>>> There is a MS OEM system builders site, it's there for the reading if>> you want, that explains that "Microsoft" considers the Motherboard as>> the "Computer" and that changing a motherboard, except to replace a>> detective one, is considered as invalidating your OEM license.

Which doesn't belong in a thread in answer to a END USER, not a SYSTEM BUILDER!

> At no point did I advocate anything - only explained why people state> what they do about OEM.

Because they are twisted individuals. You try to confuse people. And you still are hiding the password-protected site.

Are you afraid to show the URL so people can see for themselves?

> Was it too early for you to understand that?

LOL! I understand you, Lameboy. You are trying to mislead people.

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

In article <#QO8tIZpFHA.1480@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...> LOL! Again the choice is following password-protected words that are > NEVER agree to in any legal binding way or following one's own > interpretation of what point upgrading YOUR computer becomes a totally > different computer.

Kurt, sometimes you are so blinded by your dislike of things that you can't read.

The information was presented for anyone to view IF THEY WANT. Nothing was said that would force anyone to do anything or follow anything.

Are you advocating that people should not have a choice to learn? Are you advocating that people should not be free to determine how much they want to know?

Stop your ranting - I never suggested anything to force anything on anyone - I only presented that a reason people say OEM is a one machine install is based on the OEM information that MS presents to System Builders and OEM.

Leythos wrote:> In article <OBKUWNZpFHA.1444@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,> dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...>> You try to confuse people. And>> you still are hiding the password-protected site.>> Lets see - you make it sound like you can't get into it without some> special permission from MS and they hide it from everyone.

It is password-protected, and part of the SYSTEM BUILDER site, that is totally irrelevant to END USERS!

> The simple fact is that the site allows ANYONE to register and view> the information IF THEY WANT TO VIEW IT.

LOL! Registration is optional for Windows XP as an END USER. MS wants SYSTEM BUILDERS to register before viewing SYSTEM BUILDER BS!

>> The information EXPLAINS WHY people say that you can't move OEM> installations between computers.

People as in END USERS, or people as in SYSTEM BUILDERS?!

>> The information was relative to the thread because IT EXPLAINS WHY> PEOPLE SAY THAT OEM IS A SINGLE COMPUTER LICENSE/INSTALL.

LOL! Notice you still are trying to confuse!

Again, people as in END USERS, or people as in SYSTEM BUILDERS?!

>> Again, it's relative and provides understanding to issues raised in> this thread - the information I posted is not binding on anyone.

Not if they aren't SYSTEM BUILDERS. And this is a End Users group. There is a System Builders group, so why don't you go there.

> What reason do you have for wanting to hide the information from> anyone that wants to read it?

LOL! I'm not hiding anything. YOU ARE. You mention a SYSTEM BUILDERS page, that is password-protected, yet you still have not given the URL!

YOU ARE THE ONE THAT IS HIDING INFO!

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

I would like to compliment you on the clear and concise manner you have posted in response to this newsgroup thread. Those that refuse to understand will probably never understand!

-- Carey FrischMicrosoft MVPWindows XP - Shell/User

"Leythos" wrote:

> Lets see - you make it sound like you can't get into it without some > special permission from MS and they hide it from everyone.> > The simple fact is that the site allows ANYONE to register and view the > information IF THEY WANT TO VIEW IT.> > The information EXPLAINS WHY people say that you can't move OEM > installations between computers.> > The information was relative to the thread because IT EXPLAINS WHY > PEOPLE SAY THAT OEM IS A SINGLE COMPUTER LICENSE/INSTALL.> > Again, it's relative and provides understanding to issues raised in this > thread - the information I posted is not binding on anyone.> > What reason do you have for wanting to hide the information from anyone > that wants to read it?> > -- > > spam999free@rrohio.com> remove 999 in order to email me>

In article <#2c$hKapFHA.2156@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...> I am just showing that your SYSTEM BUILDER password protected info, is > totally irrelevant to them as an END USER!

Lets see, you complained about Carey stating that OEM means it can only be installed on ONE computer. You hear it time and time again, and when I explain why people say it, you complain that I provide an explanation as to why people like Carey say it.

Keep on focus, I only provided and explanation as to why people say one install for OEM - I never said anything else.

In article <ugI2DPapFHA.2904@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>, dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...> LOL! I'm not hiding anything. YOU ARE. You mention a SYSTEM BUILDERS > page, that is password-protected, yet you still have not given the URL!

Since you know it's "password - protected" you must already have the URL or at least have already viewed it.

Quit being diversionary and understand it this time - My reply was only to EXPLAIN WHY PEOPLE SAY OEM IS A SINGLE INSTALL.

Leythos wrote:> In article <ugI2DPapFHA.2904@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>,> dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...>> LOL! I'm not hiding anything. YOU ARE. You mention a SYSTEM>> BUILDERS page, that is password-protected, yet you still have not>> given the URL!>> Since you know it's "password - protected" you must already have the> URL or at least have already viewed it.

Actually, I haven't seen it in a while and I'm not the one that brought it up. It seems like you got something to hide, Lameboy! Afraid to let everyone see for themselves the URL to the info you are paraphrasing?

> Quit being diversionary and understand it this time - My reply was> only to EXPLAIN WHY PEOPLE SAY OEM IS A SINGLE INSTALL.

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:> Leythos -->> I would like to compliment you on the clear and concise manner you> have posted in response to this newsgroup thread. Those that refuse> to understand will probably never understand!

The kiss of death!

I understand quite clearly. Ya'll purposely try to present password-protected SYSTEM BUILDER web site BS, that not even SYSTEM BUILDERS have agreed to abide by, and then you try to confuse END USERS that it this non-binding SYSTEM BUILDERS BS pertains to END USERS.

And Lameboy won't even give out the link! He is purposefully hiding how it is password protected.

Understand what? That a new motherboard defines a " new computer", because Carey says so?

That is pure rubbish.

Don

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:> Leythos -->> I would like to compliment you on the clear and concise manner you> have posted in response to this newsgroup thread. Those that refuse> to understand will probably never understand!>>>> Lets see - you make it sound like you can't get into it without some>> special permission from MS and they hide it from everyone.>>>> The simple fact is that the site allows ANYONE to register and view>> the information IF THEY WANT TO VIEW IT.>>>> The information EXPLAINS WHY people say that you can't move OEM>> installations between computers.>>>> The information was relative to the thread because IT EXPLAINS WHY>> PEOPLE SAY THAT OEM IS A SINGLE COMPUTER LICENSE/INSTALL.>>>> Again, it's relative and provides understanding to issues raised in>> this thread - the information I posted is not binding on anyone.>>>> What reason do you have for wanting to hide the information from>> anyone that wants to read it?>>>> -->>>> spam999free@rrohio.com>> remove 999 in order to email me

I guess in your situation, ignorance is bliss. The OEM System Builderweb site specically states:

"OEM software is licensed to the complete computer system, but the motherboard is considered the "essence" of the computer system. Therefore, all internal components, except for the motherboard, can be replaced before a "new" computer has been created."

There are two versions of OEM Windows XP systems. One can be purchasedseparately, with qualifying subsidiary hardware, and installed withthat hardware to an existing machine, to which it becomes bound. Thesoftware may be reinstalled and reactivated indefinitely as with aretail system as long as it is still on the original machine. It maynot be transferred to a different computer. It is activated asdescribed above, but if it were installed to hardware seen as notsubstantially the same, the activation would be refused as fallingoutside the license.

In the other OEM form, the system is provided pre-installed by a majorsupplier. Instead of activation, the system is 'locked' to the BIOSon the motherboard. The validity of this lock is checked at boot. Aslong as this is satisfied, other hardware may be changed freely, butany replacement motherboard must be for a compatible one supplied bythe original maker.

If a BIOS-locked system is installed to a board where the lock fails,it enters a normal Activation process at startup. However, beginning 1March 2005, the Product Key supplied on a label by the computermanufacturer, and used for the initial intallation, will not beaccepted for activation. A new copy of Windows XP, with a licenseallowing installation on a different machine, will be needed. Thismeans that any replacement motherboard (or upgrade to its BIOS) must besupplied by the original maker, who will ensure the lock is maintained.

kurttrail wrote:> Leythos wrote:> > In article <433CDDE3-469B-4FE5-BBE5-84A842790487@microsoft.com>,> > mrxp2004@nospamyahoo.com says...> >> If you install a new motherboard that is is not the same as the> >> original, and you are using an OEM version of Windows XP, then this> >> is considered a "new computer" and the OEM license is no longer> >> considerd valid.> >> > Unless the new motherboard is replacing a defective motherboard - and> > the new one does not have to be a matching replacement. The OEM system> > builders site specifically tells us this.>> Notice you don't give the URL because it would show any RATIONAL human> being that it is password protected.>> NO End User agrees to follow what it says on that page, or even knows of> that pages existense through the EULA, so there isn't a court in the> land that would consider what it says on that page as part of ANY> agreement!>> Like Carey, you are totally full of MicroSh*t!>> --> Peace!> Kurt> Self-anointed Moderator> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea> http://microscum.com/mscommunity> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

>I guess in your situation, ignorance is bliss. The OEM System Builder>web site specically states:>>"OEM software is licensed to the complete computer system, >but the motherboard is considered the "essence" of the >computer system. Therefore, all internal components, >except for the motherboard, can be replaced before >a "new" computer has been created."

Carey, I don't know if you will answer thisCould you tell me why walmart.com is allowed to sell oem xp pro/homewith just a mouse? Walmart is not a system builder. Walmart isjust a reseller.

Comment to the other posters

Another thing that surprise me about walmart stores. There is no orvery little price reduction on Microsoft operating systems. Theyusually say to do business at Walmart you must lower your prices andgo through some type of weird deals. I am really surprised you can'tfind a xp sp full retail at walmart for $50.00 dollars.

| Carey, I don't know if you will answer this| Could you tell me why walmart.com is allowed to sell oem xp pro/home| with just a mouse? Walmart is not a system builder. Walmart is| just a reseller.| | Comment to the other posters| | Another thing that surprise me about walmart stores. There is no or| very little price reduction on Microsoft operating systems. They| usually say to do business at Walmart you must lower your prices and| go through some type of weird deals. I am really surprised you can't| find a xp sp full retail at walmart for $50.00 dollars.| | | The run about the same price Microsoft charges.| http://snipurl.com/h3ma| | | Greg Ro

| Carey, I don't know if you will answer this| Could you tell me why walmart.com is allowed to sell oem xp pro/home| with just a mouse? Walmart is not a system builder. Walmart is| just a reseller.|| Comment to the other posters|| Another thing that surprise me about walmart stores. There is no or| very little price reduction on Microsoft operating systems. They| usually say to do business at Walmart you must lower your prices and| go through some type of weird deals. I am really surprised you can't| find a xp sp full retail at walmart for $50.00 dollars.||| The run about the same price Microsoft charges.| http://snipurl.com/h3ma||| Greg Ro

In article <OXg6ZZbpFHA.2952@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>, dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...> YOU make it seem like it > is reasonable to think that a password-protected SYSTEM BUILDER web page > has any relevance to END USERS, which it plainly does not!

You really are a complete dufus today - I never suggested it had anything to do with any users - only the reasoning behind by the people that make the statement make it.

Leythos wrote:> In article <OXg6ZZbpFHA.2952@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>,> dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...>> YOU make it seem like it>> is reasonable to think that a password-protected SYSTEM BUILDER web>> page has any relevance to END USERS, which it plainly does not!>> You really are a complete dufus today - I never suggested it had> anything to do with any users - only the reasoning behind by the> people that make the statement make it.

Because they take non-binding password-protected SYSTEM BUILDER BS and try to apply it to END USERS!

It is that plain and simple, but you are trying to apologize for the idiots that do it. You say it is a choice for End Users to make. The choice is to follow idiots, or think for themselves.

Until you say outright that people that try to convince END USERS that non-binding password-protected SYSTEM BUILDER BS about not being able to change and/or upgrade Motherboards are mistaken, then in my book you are just as contemptible as the idiots spreading this nonsense.

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Leythos wrote:> In article <u#qZYqdpFHA.3036@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>,> d.burnette@clothes.comcast.net says...>> That a new motherboard defines a " new computer", because>> Carey says so?>> It has nothing to do with anyone here - The definition was something> that MS came up with and has posted for all of their OEM Vendors. It> has nothing to do with any individual here.

Tell it to Carey, as he doesn't seem to understand that non-binding password protected SYSTEM BUILDER nonsense about motherboards can't be changed and/ or upgrade has absolutely nothing to do with the END USERS posting here!

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

In article <eq$kNGepFHA.2156@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...> Until you say outright that people that try to convince END USERS that > non-binding password-protected SYSTEM BUILDER BS about not being able to > change and/or upgrade Motherboards are mistaken, then in my book you are > just as contemptible as the idiots spreading this nonsense.

And you are entitled to your opinion. As a person that's read the OEM Systems builders site (and even provided the link to year many discussions ago) I happen to believe in the Motherboard = Computer ideal that MS proposes, it actually makes sense to me - as someone that's designed motherboards and hardware. I don't care about licensing in YOUR OPINION.

Interestingly enough, I ran into that recently.I had purchased a Compaq Presario for one of my kids (what do you expect for $329 at WalMart?).The MB failed, I replaced it with a ($150) Compaq board that was sold as an OEM replacement part.I could have installed a $50-70 board that IMHO would have been more reliable and better...but the machine was barely over 1 year old.I used the restore disks (that I had to burn myself) to reinstall everything.I still had to call MS and activate the software.They initially balked, but after telling them it was an OEM replacement motherboard, they gave me the code.That's exactly that type of thing that makes me dislike the whole PA scheme.

-- For evil to prosper requires only that good men remain silent!"Dimple Wathen" <dimplewathen@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1124590304.456903.263320@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...> FYI> Here is another MVP explanation of all this (the mother is not the> "essence" of anything in it):> http://aumha.org/win5/a/wpa.php> Excerpt:>

Quote:

> There are two versions of OEM Windows XP systems. One can be purchased> separately, with qualifying subsidiary hardware, and installed with> that hardware to an existing machine, to which it becomes bound. The> software may be reinstalled and reactivated indefinitely as with a> retail system as long as it is still on the original machine. It may> not be transferred to a different computer. It is activated as> described above, but if it were installed to hardware seen as not> substantially the same, the activation would be refused as falling> outside the license.>> In the other OEM form, the system is provided pre-installed by a major> supplier. Instead of activation, the system is 'locked' to the BIOS> on the motherboard. The validity of this lock is checked at boot. As> long as this is satisfied, other hardware may be changed freely, but> any replacement motherboard must be for a compatible one supplied by> the original maker.>> If a BIOS-locked system is installed to a board where the lock fails,> it enters a normal Activation process at startup. However, beginning 1> March 2005, the Product Key supplied on a label by the computer> manufacturer, and used for the initial intallation, will not be> accepted for activation. A new copy of Windows XP, with a license> allowing installation on a different machine, will be needed. This> means that any replacement motherboard (or upgrade to its BIOS) must be> supplied by the original maker, who will ensure the lock is maintained.>

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message news:uNb5g0dpFHA.1444@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...>I guess in your situation, ignorance is bliss. The OEM System Builder> web site specically states:>> "OEM software is licensed to the complete computer system,> but the motherboard is considered the "essence" of the> computer system. Therefore, all internal components,> except for the motherboard, can be replaced before> a "new" computer has been created.">> -- > Carey Frisch> Microsoft MVP> Windows XP - Shell/User> Microsoft Newsgroups

Leythos wrote:> In article <eq$kNGepFHA.2156@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>,> dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...>> Until you say outright that people that try to convince END USERS>> that non-binding password-protected SYSTEM BUILDER BS about not>> being able to change and/or upgrade Motherboards are mistaken, then>> in my book you are just as contemptible as the idiots spreading this>> nonsense.>> And you are entitled to your opinion. As a person that's read the OEM> Systems builders site (and even provided the link to year many> discussions ago) I happen to believe in the Motherboard = Computer> ideal that MS proposes, it actually makes sense to me - as someone> that's designed motherboards and hardware. I don't care about> licensing in YOUR OPINION.

But it is totally non-binding, especially when it to END USERS! That is not an opinion, that is reality, since not one END USER agreed to it. You can decide to give your first born to Bill Gates, but that is volunteering to do something outside of any agreement. By the same token you can voluntarily decide to never change a motherboard on your computer with OEM XP install, but that is your choice to volunteer.

Most people here aren't asking about volunteering to do stuff they NEVER agreed to. You know that. But you insist on presenting it, not as volunteering, but as a rational choice, which it isn't, any more than giving Bill Gates your first born is a rational choice.

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Dimple Wathen wrote:> FYI>> Here is another MVP explanation of all this (the mother is not the> "essence" of anything in it):>> http://aumha.org/win5/a/wpa.php>> Excerpt:>>

Quote:

> There are two versions of OEM Windows XP systems. One can be purchased> separately, with qualifying subsidiary hardware, and installed with> that hardware to an existing machine, to which it becomes bound. The> software may be reinstalled and reactivated indefinitely as with a> retail system as long as it is still on the original machine. It may> not be transferred to a different computer. It is activated as> described above, but if it were installed to hardware seen as not> substantially the same, the activation would be refused as falling> outside the license.>> In the other OEM form, the system is provided pre-installed by a major> supplier. Instead of activation, the system is 'locked' to the BIOS> on the motherboard. The validity of this lock is checked at boot. As> long as this is satisfied, other hardware may be changed freely, but> any replacement motherboard must be for a compatible one supplied by> the original maker.>> If a BIOS-locked system is installed to a board where the lock fails,> it enters a normal Activation process at startup. However, beginning 1> March 2005, the Product Key supplied on a label by the computer> manufacturer, and used for the initial intallation, will not be> accepted for activation. A new copy of Windows XP, with a license> allowing installation on a different machine, will be needed. This> means that any replacement motherboard (or upgrade to its BIOS) must> be supplied by the original maker, who will ensure the lock is> maintained.

"Just where the machine is seen as no longer the same and therefore no longer qualifying for the license under the OEM EULA is a grey area - and the EULA itself does not appear to me actually to bear the interpretation MS representatives here put on it . . . . I see nothing that is specific about such a license being tided to a motherboard - the EULA strictly ties it to whatever item of hardware it was bought with." - Alex Nichol, MVP - http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/msg/5c692df84077bb74

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

NotMe wrote:> Interestingly enough, I ran into that recently.> I had purchased a Compaq Presario for one of my kids (what do you> expect for $329 at WalMart?).> The MB failed, I replaced it with a ($150) Compaq board that was sold> as an OEM replacement part.> I could have installed a $50-70 board that IMHO would have been more> reliable and better...but the machine was barely over 1 year old.> I used the restore disks (that I had to burn myself) to reinstall> everything.> I still had to call MS and activate the software.> They initially balked, but after telling them it was an OEM> replacement motherboard, they gave me the code.> That's exactly that type of thing that makes me dislike the whole PA> scheme.

And according to Carey, MS should have made you buy a new copy of XP.

-- Peace!KurtSelf-anointed Moderatormicroscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrheahttp://microscum.com/mscommunity"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"